FedEx Cup 3.0 - Still Not Really a Playoff
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 10, 2008 2:14 PM EST
Email
PrintFrom the looks of things, FedEx Cup 3.0 is pretty well close to designed and will soon be voted upon by the Tour Policy Board.
Bob Harig provides us with an overview and an update.
The overall champion will not be determined before the Tour Championship, it will be nearly impossible for a major championship winner not to qualify for the season-ending event featuring 30 players, the overall point distribution will be greatly simplified and field sizes for playoff events will be reduced.
In the proposal, the point system would be overhauled to where the winner of a tournament will receive 500 points (it had been 4,500) with the totals decreasing down to one point for the 70th-place finisher. Still to be determined is how many points players will receive for winning a major championship, the Players Championship or a World Golf Championship event.
Tom Pernice Jr., another PAC member, said he believed there will be a 20 percent increase in points awarded for the majors.
After two straight years of the FedEx Cup being all but decided before the playoff-ending Tour Championship in Atlanta, the tour went back to the drawing board and was determined to come up with a system that would ensure that more players have an opportunity to win the $10 million bonus if they make it to the 30 player field.
The proposal also calls for a reduction in field size at those events: from 144 players to 125 at the Barclays; from 120 to 90 at the Deutsche Bank; and from 70 to 60 at the BMW. The top 30 in the points standings would still advance to the Tour Championship, where their point totals would be reset to assure that everybody in the field at least has a mathematical chance of winning the FedEx Cup.
There are still some outstanding issues, such as penalties for skipping events. (There should be since the new reset will almost ensure that major winners and top players will get into the Tour Championship.) Also, the reset at the Tour Championship that makes winning the FedEx Cup mathetmatically possible for anyone in the TC field is yet to be defined.
But, remember all of those great ideas about how to improve the FedEx Cup that weren't basically the same framework of the last two FedEx Cups - that haven't really worked in terms of generating fan interest or ratings? Yup, not considering those.
"Certainly the goal is to have everybody who is in the tournament have a chance to win the FedEx Cup if they win the tournament," said PAC member Brett Quigley. "There will be some excitement for the Tour Championship and the FedEx Cup and for us. That's the goal. Nothing has been finalized but certainly that is what we are trying to do, getting it to where everybody really has a chance and it is more of a true playoff."
Basically, this was a ploy to the mediocre players that they could still, somehow, magically win the FedEx Cup if every other good player came down with pneumonia at East Lake.
"My personal suggestion was everybody start at zero at the Tour Championship," Pernice said. "Whoever wins the Tour Championship wins the $10 million. But there were a lot of concerns with that. Guys might only be worried about trying to get into the playoffs and not worried about a high seed. They could skip the playoffs."
They could skip the playoffs anyway. Tiger had a decent chance to make the Tour Championship with just six starts. Who's to say that it wouldn't take the bare minimum to get into the Tour Championship now?
And, finally, a jab at the LPGA Tour's exciting, compelling, and so-not-FedEx-Cup ADT Championship:
Another idea -- to have a one-day shootout among a handful of top finishers in the FedEx Cup points a day after the Tour Championship to decide the FedEx champion -- was quickly shot down.
"Someone brought it up, but other tours have tried it and it's too much of a crapshoot I think," Quigley said. "For a guy to play great all year and play one bad round or one mediocre round and not have a chance to win ... in theory, a guy could win every major and not win that shootout and that's certainly not a good test of the system."
Isn't a "crapshoot" the whole point of a playoff system? If you qualify for the Playoffs, then shouldn't you have a mathematically plausible chance of winning them? That's not possible in today's system, or FEC 1.0. If that's what the PGA Tour wants - well, it's rank and file - then that's ok. Just don't call it a playoff anymore. Stop lying to us. It's not a playoff. It is a reward for a season of consistent play.
A real playoff only rewards consistent play with entry into the playoff. It doesn't essentially assure them a spot in the finale. That's why the Patriots had to earn their way to the Superbowl. It's why the Angels didn't get to the World Series.
So, if this is the system we have, then it's not a playoff. It's something else. And let's identify it as such.
18 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
whatever
these clowns will find some way to complain when all is said and done.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
True
You really can’t please everyone. Unfortunately, that’s what the Tour tries to do.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 10, 2008 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
now wait a minute...
…that ’s what I said the other day and you disagreed with me !! :-P
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
That you can't please everyone?
I was saying that the Tour should take suggestions from all corners, I think. Ultimately, the Tour has to decide on which are the best suggestions – not lump them all together so that everyone is equally unhappy with it. In that regard, we agree. :)
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 10, 2008 3:09 PM EST up reply actions
and when you take suggestions from everyone ?...
…you’re trying to please everyone… (too much driving time in the car this weekend ? you’re usually not this easy) :-D
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
Actually, that's not true at all
You can listen to everyone in the room and still not actually implement a suggestion they make. Our new President-elect does that. :)
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 10, 2008 3:39 PM EST up reply actions
LMAO !!
well – at least I won’t be alone in getting beatings from D ! :-) (I’m still wondering when Oprah is going to give away her billion dollar empire and move into something she can afford on $249,999 a year…errr…$200k…errrr…$150k….errr….$120k. Or when Biden is going to apologize for sitting in the evil rich owners box at the Steelers game yesterday.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
I couldn't help myself
I think a tax increase is pretty inevitable, especially since we tacked onto the bailout of AIG today. Yikes.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 10, 2008 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
this is going to get ugly
Obama doesn’t seem to understand that the Constitution was drawn up to LIMIT government. Sadly, he is the inevitable sum of all the parts of government school education. FDR is getting his wish…and so is Kruschev.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
since you brought it up...
Wow, CG, you were chock full of wing-nutty goodness yesterday, weren’t you? Senator Obama hasn’t even been sworn in yet — Shrub is still the president — and you’re picking on him already. It be proper to wait until he has the authority to act. The current Republican run Treasury Department is doing all the bailing, as usual, without oversight. I suggest you focus your anger at Paulson.
Oh, and that Constitution thing… I didn’t hear you squealing when the current administration shredded the 4th Amendment.
actually
I think it would be nice if Obama didn’t insult the sitting president to his face while getting his tour of the White House. Saying that the country needed a breath of fresh air after Bush’s administration ? While the man is in the room – seriously – this is the guy who has “class” ???
ummm – check your history – the rules Bush was following that you say “shreaded” the 4th amendment were set up under LBJ. And now, you’re going to resort to the time tested “well HE did it” defense for ignoring the Constitution ?
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
huh?
Did Obama really do that? If he did you must be youtube footage. Post a link.
There are no rules for wiretapping without a warrant. There are no rules for denial of Habeas Corpus.
I'll see what I can find - it was just a few days ago.
It was on the news.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
He trashed the guy for 2 years
This isn’t anything new.
by Ryan Ballengee on Nov 12, 2008 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
true, but...
2 years was “campaigning” – not exactly a good excuse for bad manners and lies – but that’s what the process has become. This was after Bush gave him a tour of the White House and gave him some heads up on what’s coming.
On a lighter note – the Sunday evening news on ABC showed Mrs Bush giving Mrs Obama her tour – part of it was the view from the First Lady’s office/study. It has a window that looks into the Oval Office. The first thing that popped into my mind was “where the heck was Hilary Clinton when Slick was discussing cigars with the interns ?” :-)
On the whole – it was pretty much a typical liberal media report – only children of Democrat presidential families were shown. The tone of the piece was how much better the White House will look now that Michelle Obama is doing the decorating. (I didn’t notice any antlers or deer heads or wagon wheel tables in the Presidential apartment). And no mention was made of the Clinton’s raid on/theft of electronics, office supplies and decorations when they moved out.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
a few things
First, the Clinton’s did not raid/steal/trash anything when they moved out. That was a wingnut smear.
Second, ABC is pretty good if on Sunday they can show a video of something that didn’t happen until Monday.
Third, Obama was running against Bush policies so of course he was going to say negative things about the policies. I never heard him say anything negative about Bush personally, or his family.
Fourth, the last Republican to have small children in the White House was… maybe before film was invented???
Truth has a well-known liberal bias.
Bush wasn't running
This was a dumb campaign on all sides. Obama kept running against Bush and Palin – but Bush wasn’t running, and Palin was up for VP. People elected a big smile and a poster – and ignored his government first policies. McCain was not my choice for president – but he was who I was stuck voting for. He was almost as smarmy as Obama – but not to the same radical extent. Oh well.
Odd – there were pictures of Mrs Bush and Mrs Obama together on the news at the White House. ’splain that one Lucy.
and yes – the Clintons broke, damaged, and stole their way out the door.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
unbelievable
Where do you get your information?
Obama never mentioned Palin. He mentioned McCain and that McCain would be Bush’s third term. He was running against McCain, not Palin.
The pictures were from Monday, not Sunday.
No, the Clintons did not loot the White House. That story was made up by the same people who had been trying to frame Bill for any “criminal” act (that he never committed, by the way) since his first term as Arkansas governor. All that time, all that so-called legal talent, all that money, and the only thing they ever got to stick was a BJ. Either he was innocent of whatever the wingnuts tried to charge him with or they’re incredibly incompetent. I’m guessing both are true.
Truth has a well-known liberal bias.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
Related FanPosts on Waggle Room
Related FanShots on Waggle Room
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
